The transfer fund thing...

Forgive me if I'm going over old ground, but I haven't had much time to go over all previous comments...

To me, the fundamental problem with it is that it assumes that the one big problem the club has is lack of transfer funds and that just a bit extra would make all the difference in, say, getting Tiny. A few problems with that:
- if we don't have any funds then we're f**ked anyway and a few hundred grand will make little difference given the quality of players we would be intersted in and their likely wage demands (which come from where?)
- we shouldn't really be inflating the transfer market by over-paying for a player. Seems to me that we've valued him at a certain price and - for once - we're refusing to budge from that
- the transfer market is vastly more complicated than simply paying a transfer fee. There are agents fees, wages, bonuses, contract negotiations, the player's family, the selling club, etc.

It seems to me, too, that we don't get an awful lot back for our donations. At least if we make a loan or buy shares there is an expected return (with a risk of a loss) at some point.

I note too from the PinkUn article that the fund would be less admin fees. Any idea how much that might be? I believe charities fork out a fair proportion in admin and they often get services at reduced cost. What about taxation?

Posted By: BerlinCanary, Jan 24, 09:44:42